Showing posts with label malingering. Show all posts
Showing posts with label malingering. Show all posts

Saturday, December 09, 2017

Research review of efficacy of effort testing with culturally, ethnically, and linguistically diverse populations

Cross-Cultural Feigning Assessment: A Systematic Review of Feigning Instruments Used With Linguistically, Ethnically, and Culturally Diverse Samples

Alicia Nijdam-Jones and Barry Rosenfeld Fordham University

The cross-cultural validity of feigning instruments and cut-scores is a critical concern for forensic mental health clinicians. This systematic review evaluated feigning classification accuracy and effect sizes across instruments and languages by summarizing 45 published peer-reviewed articles and unpublished doctoral dissertations conducted in Europe, Asia, and North America using linguistically, ethnically, and culturally diverse samples. The most common psychiatric symptom measures used with linguistically, ethnically, and culturally diverse samples included the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptom-atology, the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test, and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI). The most frequently studied cognitive effort measures included the Word Recogni-tion Test, the Test of Memory Malingering, and the Rey 15-item Memory test. The classification accuracy of these measures is compared and the implications of this research literature are discussed.

Public Significance Statement This study suggests that there is only a modest amount of research examining the use of feigning assessment measures with linguistically, ethnically, and culturally diverse populations. As psychol-ogists in the United States and other Western, English-speaking countries assess individuals from diverse linguistic, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds, it is important that the assessment techniques that they rely on have demonstrated utility in non-English cultures and languages.

Lick on image to enlarge. Article link.




- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Monday, November 30, 2009

Assessment issues: Malingering detection on WAIS-III and third-party testing observers

Research briefs regarding malingering assessment on WAIS-III in TBI and use of third-party observers during psychological assessment posted at ICDP sister blog

Friday, November 06, 2009

The complex issues in MR/ID Atkins death penalty cases: APA Div 33 Ad Hoc Committee on Mental Retardation 2006 list

As I continue to manage this blog, it has become increasingly clear that the psychological and legal issues involved in Atkins MR/ID death penalty cases are very lenghty and complex.  Last night I skimmed a Div 33 Newsletter article (Vol 31, Issue 2, 2006 - click here to find way to obtain copy) that had an article that described the role and function of the Ad Hoc Committee on Mental Retardation and the Death Penalty.  Although the list of issues was generated in 2006, most all still seem pertinent today.  I've reproduced the list of issues below.  Of course, the 1992 AAMR manual mentioned has since been replaced by the 2002 10th and just recently the 2009 11th edition.

Clearly there is much to address, discuss, research, resolve.  I get tired and overwhelmed just reading the list.  I can only hope that the ICDP blog contributes in some small way to the resolution of some of these issues:
 
Qualifications of experts
• Qualifications of psychologists (Licensure? Experience in mental retardation? Forensic training?)
• Qualifications of other experts (In the Atkins trial in Virginia, only a psychologist could testify regarding diagnosis, although other experts testified about other issues.)
• Use of lay experts (How do psychologists obtain and use information from lay persons who know the defendant?) with a background in mental retardation and little forensic experience.)
• Protection of raw test data and test protocols (Ethical principles 9.04 and 9.11)
Issues related to definition of mental retardation
• The Supreme Court used the 1992 American Association on Mental Retardation definition. Should a psychologist offer best interpretation and application of that definition or make suggestions to states for new definitions that are congruent with Atkins?
• Since the 1992 definition is widely used in Atkins hearings, is there consensus on the meaning of the 10 areas of adaptive behavior as they apply to forensic circumstances? (They are only briefly described in the 1992 AAMR manual.) Is a new manual needed that addresses forensic procedures?
• Use of terms: mild, moderate, severe, borderline
• Use of the mental age concept
• Times at which mental retardation must be determined: childhood, time of the crime, present (This question will be determined differently by different courts.)
• Issue of taking an isolated example of high skill to show no mental retardation (e.g., language use, driving a car)
Issues Related to Retrospective Diagnosis
• Role of archival information
• School records; missing or incomplete records; problems in interpretation of old school records
• Lack of Special Education documentation in some records (It is policy for some school systems to delete this information.)
• Interpretation of past testing reports
• Standards for interpretation of old tests (Are they interpreted by the norms of their time, or can they be re-interpreted based on more contemporary psychometric methods?)
• Proper methods to obtain information from informants
• Possible biases in the memories of informants Ethical/Professional Issues
• Independence of the evaluation vs. advocacy role (This is not unique to Atkins cases, but it may be a confusing issue for psychologists Measurement of Intelligence
• Choosing a proper test
• Qualifications of tester
• Firm IQ cutoffs vs. ranges (Law may make no mention of range or variability of scores.)
• Global IQ vs. subtest scores (Are subtest scores or Verbal or Performance IQs relevant?)
• Interpretation of group tests and short forms. Should they be considered at all?
• Attempts to alter or reinterpret IQ scores after the fact (e.g., He had higher potential. He could have done better. His “true” IQ is 5 points higher.). Invalid score vs. altered or reinterpreted score.
• Interpretation of variability of scores with repeated testing.
• Flynn effect (Does it apply to individual scores?)
• Practice effect Adaptive Behavior
• Is adaptive behavior measured solely by functioning, or can potential be considered?
• Interpretation of cultural factors
• Value of multiple respondents
• Value of multiple sources and types of information (e.g., archival, anecdotal, standardized instruments, direct observation)
• Is it valid to use the events of the crime to show adaptive behavior?
• Problems assessing adaptive behavior in prison.
• Role of clinical interview and observation in prison
• Is it valid to use maladaptive behavior as evidence of adequate adaptive behavior?
• Is it valid to argue against a diagnosis of mental retardation by interpreting low adaptive behavior as a behavior disorder, not retardation? (“It’s not mental retardation; it’s a conduct disorder.”)
• Is reliance on others or need for support a key characteristic of mental retardation in adults? (This factor is only indirectly assessed in tests of adaptive behavior.)
• Is naïveté or gullibility or susceptibility to undue influence of others a critical characteristic of mental retardation? This factor is emphasized in the literature on mental retardation (e.g., Greenspan, 1999) but not in tests of adaptive behavior.
• Role of standardized tests of adaptive behavior
• Can standardized tests of adaptive behavior (e.g., SIB-R, ABAS-II) be given retrospectively? What adaptations are acceptable?
• Is client self-report of adaptive behavior valid (either anecdotally or in response to the ABAS)?
• Is the Street Survival Skills Questionnaire a valid instrument for diagnosing mental retardation?
• Role of anecdotal information from informants
• Bias in information from informants (possible bias in either direction)
• Lack of visible stigmata
• Association with conditions of poverty
• Heritable component Responsibility of psychologist in educating the court about characteristics of mild mental retardation
• Variability in skills
• “Cloak of Competence” - influence of trying to look good
• Mental retardation vs. mental illness
• Mental retardation not defined by etiology but by functioning Assessing malingering
• Appropriate methods and instruments


Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, October 23, 2009

Research Bytes 10-23-08: RIAS/WAIS-III,Gv,imagery,neuropsychology,test norms



Articles that caught my eye during my weekly search of a wide range of professional literature.

Smith, B. L., McChristian, C. L., Smith, T. D., & Meaux, J. (2009). The relationshipo of the Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales and the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Third Edition. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 109(1), 30-40.

The purpose of this study was to compare scores on the Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales (RIAS) with scores on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Third Edition (WAIS-III) in a group of college students diagnosed with a Learning Disability, Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), or a combination of the two. The RIAS Composite Index score was significantly higher than the WAIS-III Full Scale IQ, although scores on both tests were in the average range. Correlations between the two tests were significant on all measures. Male students were significantly higher than female students on both the RIAS Composite Index and on the WAIS-III Full Scale IQ. Although the ADHD group was higher on IQ than the Learning Disabled and combined disorder groups on all IQ measures, no significant differences were found.

Heilbronner, R. L., Sweet, J. J., Morgan, J. E., Larrabee, G. J., & Millis, S. R. (2009). American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology Consensus Conference Statement on the Neuropsychological Assessment of Effort, Response Bias, and Malingering. Clinical Neuropsychologist, 23(7), 1093-1129.
During the past two decades clinical and research efforts have led to increasingly sophisticated and effective methods and instruments designed to detect exaggeration or fabrication of neuropsychological dysfunction, as well as somatic and psychological symptom complaints. A vast literature based on relevant research has emerged and substantial portions of professional meetings attended by clinical neuropsychologists have addressed topics related to malingering (Sweet, King, Malina, Bergman, & Simmons, 2002). Yet, despite these extensive activities, understanding the need for methods of detecting problematic effort and response bias and addressing the presence or absence of malingering has proven challenging for practitioners. A consensus conference, comprised of national and international experts in clinical neuropsychology, was held at the 2008 Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology (AACN) for the purposes of refinement of critical issues in this area. This consensus statement documents the current state of knowledge and recommendations of expert clinical neuropsychologists and is intended to assist clinicians and researchers with regard to the neuropsychological assessment of effort, response bias, and malingering.

Thompson, W. L., Slotnick, S. D., Burrage, M. S., & Kosslyn, S. M. (2009). Two Forms of Spatial Imagery: Neuroimaging Evidence. Psychological Science, 20(10), 1245-1253
Spatial imagery may be useful in such tasks as interpreting graphs and solving geometry problems, and even in performing surgery. This study provides evidence that spatial imagery is not a single faculty; rather, visualizing spatial location and mentally transforming location rely on distinct neural networks. Using 3-T functional magnetic resonance imaging, we tested 16 participants (8 male, 8 female) in each of two spatial imagery tasks—one that required visualizing location and one that required mentally rotating stimuli. The same stimuli were used in the two tasks. The location-based task engendered more activation near the occipito-parietal sulcus, medial posterior cingulate, and precuneus, whereas the transformation task engendered more activation in superior portions of the parietal lobe and in the postcentral gyrus. These differences in activation provide evidence that there are at least two different types of spatial imagery.

Dellatolas, G., Watier, L., LeNormand, M. T., Lubart, T., & ChevrieMuller, C. (2009). Rhythm Reproduction in Kindergarten, Reading Performance at Second Grade, and Developmental Dyslexia Theories. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 24(6), 555-563.
Temporal processing deficit could be associated with a specific difficulty in learning to read. In 1951, Stambak provided preliminary evidence that children with dyslexia performed less well than good readers in reproduction of 21 rhythmic patterns. Stambak's task was administered to 1,028 French children aged 5–6 years. The score distribution (from 0 to 21) was quasi-normal, with some children failing completely and other performing perfectly. In second grade, reading was assessed in 695 of these children. Kindergarten variables explained 26% of the variance of the reading score at second grade. The Stambak score was strongly and linearly related to reading performance in second grade, after partialling out performance on other tasks (oral repetition, attention, and visuo-spatial tasks) and socio-cultural level. Findings are discussed in relation to perceptual, cerebellar, intermodal, and attention-related theories of developmental dyslexia. It is concluded that simple rhythm reproduction tasks in kindergarten are predictive of later reading performance.

Crawford, J. R., Garthwaite, P. H., & Slick, D. J. (2009). On percentile norms in neuropsychology: Proposed reporting standards and methods for quantifying the uncertainty over the percentile ranks of test scores. Clinical Neuropsychologist, 23(7), 1173-1195.
Normative data for neuropsychological tests are often presented in the form of percentiles. One problem when using percentile norms stems from uncertainty over the definitional formula for a percentile. (There are three co-existing definitions and these can produce substantially different results.) A second uncertainty stems from the use of a normative sample to estimate the standing of a raw score in the normative population. This uncertainty is unavoidable but its extent can be captured using methods developed in the present paper. A set of reporting standards for the presentation of percentile norms in neuropsychology is proposed. An accompanying computer program (available to download) implements these standards and generates tables of point and interval estimates of percentile ranks for new or existing normative data.

McGee, C. L., Delis, D. C., & Holdnack, J. A. (2009). Cognitive Discrepancies in Children at the Ends of the Bell Curve: A Note of Caution for Clinical Interpretation. Clinical Neuropsychologist, 23(7), 1160-1172.
Discrepancies between IQ scores on the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI) and scores from the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS) were examined at different levels of intellectual functioning in 470 normal-functioning youths (aged 8-19) from the co-standardization sample of the WASI and D-KEFS. Results demonstrated that children with lower IQ scores often had significantly higher D-KEFS scores, whereas children with higher IQ scores often had significantly lower D-KEFS scores. Similar patterns were identified for discrepancies between Verbal and Performance IQ indices. These findings are similar to those found in the adult literature. Clinicians are advised to be cautious when weighing the clinical significance of cognitive discrepancies at the ends of the bell-curve and should avoid interpreting discrepancies in isolation.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,